In this segment, I answered a question on solutions to widespread racism.

Should the government intervene when widespread racism makes life impossible for some people? Given that the effect of strictly respecting the rights of private property owners in the South was that blacks could not find accommodations, health care, transportation, food, and other basic necessities of life, shouldn’t the government have intervened? Didn’t civil rights legislation help eliminate racism – and wasn’t that a good thing – even if that meant violating the right to property of racists?

My Answer, In Brief: Severe and widespread racism can only survive when enforced by government. As such, the solution to such racism is the elimination of the government’s violations of rights based on race. That will radically change a culture in and of itself. To attempt to do more – particularly to ban racism in private transactions – violates the rights of innocent people and sets a terrible precedent.

In this segment, I answered a question on recommended works of Aristotle.

What works of Aristotle do you recommend reading? As a layperson interested in philosophy, I’d like to educate myself on the philosophy of Aristotle. I’m particularly interested in developing a better understanding of epistemology and metaphysics. What works should I read, and where should I start? Do you recommend any secondary sources?

My Answer, In Brief: Aristotle is difficult but rewarding reading. Choose your readings based on your interests, and be very selective about any secondary sources.

Should a man be able to prevent his pregnant girlfriend from aborting his baby? Sometimes, a man will get his girlfriend pregnant accidentally, and they disagree about what should be done. If the man wants the woman to carry the pregnancy to term, whether to give up the baby for adoption or him take sole custody, while the woman wants to get an abortion, should he be able to prevent her? It’s his baby, shouldn’t he have some say?

My Answer, In Brief: The right to abortion is not based on any property right in the fetus. Rather, the right to abortion is based on a woman’s right to her own body, including the fact that the embryo or fetus is not a person. The man might object, but he has no moral or legal right to interfere.

If a married couple wouldn’t marry again, should they split? Many married couples seem to stay together due to inertia, not because they truly value each other. My view is that if a couple wouldn’t marry again, they should get divorced. Is that too high a bar in marriage?

My Answer, In Brief: A married couple probably should divorce if they wouldn’t marry again, provided that the romance is truly dead.

Conclusion (1:07:07)

Thank you for joining us for this episode! SupportOur WorkRemember, Philosophy in Action Radio is available to anyone, free of charge. That’s because our goal is to spread rational principles for real life far and wide, as we do every week to thousands of listeners. We love producing every episode, but each requires requires our time, effort, and money – week in and week out. So if you enjoy and value our work, please contribute to our tip jar. We suggest $5 per episode or $20 per month, but any amount is appreciated. You can send your contribution via Dwolla, PayPal, or US Mail.

About Philosophy in Action Radio

Philosophy in Action Radio applies rational principles to the challenges of real life in live internet radio shows on Sunday mornings and Thursday evenings. For information on upcoming shows, visit the Episodes on Tap. For podcasts of past shows, visit the Show Archives.